By Stephen Norris
Galloway Without Pylons co-ordinator Paul Swift says part of SP Energy
Networks’ closing submission “must be challenged in fact”
The company behind a controversial Stewartry pylon project has been accused
The Scottish Government has vetoed publication of SP Energy Networks’
closing submission on erecting 118 electricity towers between Glenlee and
Tongland because some comments “may be liable to cause offence”.
The move, made on July 4, was the final chapter of a lengthy public inquiry
process into SPEN’s Kendoon-Tongland Reinforcement (KTR) project to upgrade
the local electricity grid.
Now Paul Swift, co-ordinator of project opponents Galloway Without Pylons,
has written to the Scottish Government saying part of SPEN’s submission
“must be challenged in fact”.
His complaint concerns a pre-examination meeting (PEM) at Kirkcudbright on
June 15 last year, at which ground rules for the inquiry were set.
SPEN claimed in its submission Mr Swift “assured” reporter Katrina Rice he
intended to “instruct an ‘expert’ witness” to challenge its case.
But no evidence of Mr Swift making such a statement can be found in the
publicly available webcast of the meeting.
The discrepancy is important because throughout its submission SPEN alludes
to the alleged inadequacy of evidence led by an expert later hired by GWP.
In his letter to the government’s planning and appeals division (DPEA), Mr
Swift said: “I would like the applicant to show me evidence that
corroborates what they say I said.
“I went to the PEM meeting as a complete novice and I cannot recollect any
conversation with Ms Katrina Rice.
“All I can remember is answering her questions and trying very hard trying
to follow the alien, to me, procedures.
“To make sure, I watched the podcast from the preliminary examination
meeting and found no evidence of my alleged remarks.”
He added: “I left the meeting feeling rather daunted by the whole event and
realised that GWP needed legal advice to help us navigate a complicated
process.
“I didn’t even think about an ‘expert’ witness at this point.”
Mr Swift told the News: “I would like to know why SPEN have done this.
“I’ll apologise if I’m wrong but it appears they have made this up.
“And you have to ask the question – why? I would like to get the reply from
the DPEA before I start saying anything else.”
The disputed section reads: “Mr Swift at the PEM assured the reporter that
it was his intention to instruct an ‘expert’ witness on the topic of the
technical and economic justifications for the KTR Project who would
challenge the applicant’s needs case.”
SPEN was asked to respond to Mr Swift’s claim that its statement was untrue.
A SP Energy Networks spokesperson said: “SPEN participated fully in the PLI
process, including preparing closing submissions which fully reflects its
understanding of the events at inquiry.”
GWP is not against the upgrade but wants the new line to follow the
existing pylons east of Loch Ken or, failing that, to be put underground.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/local-news/company-behind-dumfries-galloway-pylon-30503693
0 Comments